American Acceptance of Shootings, Differences between the US and China

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 18 September 2013
by Editorial (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jessica Whale . Edited by Kyrstie Lane.
The shooting that occurred on Sept. 16 at the U.S. Navy Yard located in Washington left 13 people dead, including the shooter. There were 14 additional people injured. The suspect, 34 years old, had served in the Navy for four years, and continued working as a contractor after retiring from service. Following the shooting, Obama criticized the perpetrator, calling him "cowardly."

Shootings are a long-standing problem for America. They happen again and again, each time sparking massive debate, but the situation just keeps going around in circles; no actual progress is ever made. These shootings provide a unique angle from which to observe and understand American society.

Following a mass shooting, the American president makes a speech filled with encouraging and infectious dialogue. The president will not push to take steps to solve the problem or even make any promises to do so. American society does not expect shootings to be prevented or reduced; they do not even believe it is the government's responsibility. American society is completely "resigned" to continued shootings and does not demand "responsibility" from their government or believe they "must do something."

American attitudes toward gun control are highly divided. There are some people who, no matter how many shootings there are, will still not accept any limits or control over guns, while others advocate for gun control. But after matching up these two groups, there is not enough strength to enact actual gun control. This is a "hornet's nest," and at best, the president is just showing off a strong demeanor while not daring to actually stir up trouble.

If gun control were implemented, it would be monumental social reform to American society, which includes 270 million gun owners. Several areas of society would be affected: Other than individual hobbies and personal security, the huge gun industry including the production and sale of guns would suffer. Foreigners will see this as a bit odd: Shootings have killed so many people, and yet gun control is still not needed? But it really is this difficult.

It cannot be said that America is "in chaos" because of the shootings themselves. American society's strong sense and high capabilities for social autonomy along with a "small" government are the major reasons for this. Speaking objectively, there are 270 million firearms scattered among the people; every year more than 100,000 people are shot and approximately 30,000 people are killed by guns. This ratio is still relatively low.

American society and Chinese society have vast social differences. China has a "big" government; society requires it to take "infinite" responsibility. Media commentary saying China should also have a "small” government is not all that sincere, and actually some people hope for a "big" government while some hope for a "small" government. There is no clear order and public opinion is correspondingly mixed up.

The Chinese people do not have firearms, but there are criminals with homemade guns and bombs. In China, the occurrence of poisoning is not infrequent. Chinese society does not have enough social autonomy and depends on the government to handle things and bring everyone together. Maintaining the same level of public security would cost much more in China than in America. There is no way this does not have an effect on social governance in China.

Imagine if guns were common in basic levels of Chinese society. Now think of public opinion about the government's responsibilities following the knife attacks at a Chinese school and compare it to the relative calm following shootings in schools and public places in America. It is not too difficult to see how different social governance in the two countries really is.

America has its problems, and China does too. Both countries should refrain from taking joy in the others' misfortunes, learn from each other and be more encouraging toward the other. One point is clear: Peace and order, in any society, are the most important.


位于华盛顿的美国海军大楼16日发生枪击案,造成包括1名枪手在内的13人死亡,另有14人受伤。34岁的犯罪嫌疑人曾在海军服役4年,退役后受雇于军方的承包商。事件发生后,奥巴马指责行凶者是“懦夫”。

  枪案是美国长久的痛。它在美国反复发生,引来大量争论,但问题在原地打转,毫无解决的进展。枪案为我们观察、了解美国社会提供了独特角度。

  重大枪案发生后,美国总统会发表讲话,说一些激励社会、有感染力的话。总统不会坚决推动解决问题的措施,也不向社会做这样的承诺。社会也没有不再发生或者减少发生枪案的期待,不认为做到这一点是政府的责任。美国社会总体上对不断发生枪案“很认命”,对政府的要求不是“责任制”的,比如要政府“必须做到什么”。

  美国人对控枪的态度是高度分裂的,有一批无论发生多少枪案也不接受控枪的铁杆枪粉,也有主张控枪的群体。但双方平衡对冲后,剩不下能够对控枪造成实际推动的力量。这是个“马蜂窝”,美国总统顶多做做样子,不敢真去捅它。

  如果实行控枪,对民间拥有2.7亿枪支的美国来说是重大社会改革,牵动很多利益,除了个人的爱好和安全感以外,它还会触动生产及销售枪支的庞大经济利益链。外人会觉得美国有点“怪”:因枪案死这么多人,控枪难道不是理所当然的吗?然而它真的就是这么难。

  不能因为枪案多,就认为美国“很乱”。美国是自治色彩浓厚的社会,政府之所以“小”,社会的自治能力高是重要原因。客观而言,有2.7亿枪支“散落”在民间,每年有10余万人遭遇枪击,约3万人死于枪伤,这个比例还是比较低的。

  美国是与我们有着巨大差异的社会。中国的政府“大”,社会要求它承担的责任也是“无限的”。舆论界关于中国也应是“小政府”的呼声并不太真诚,实际上大家是有时希望政府“大”,有时希望政府“小”,这当中并无明显规律,舆论的态度相当混乱。

  中国民间无枪械,但有犯罪分子会自制土枪土炸弹,中国发生投毒案件的比例不低。中国社会自治能力不足,就靠政府对管理的加强部分来“凑”。维持同样水平的社会治安,在中国要比在美国的管理成本高很多。这一切不可能不对中国社会治理的基本面产生影响。

  想想看如果中国基层社会普遍拥枪会发生什么,再看看中国学校里发生持刀砍杀师生事件后,舆论对政府的要求又是什么,对比美国反复出现校园和公共场所枪击案后社会的相对平静,大概不难悟出中美两国的社会治理文化是多么不同。

  美国自有它一本难念的经,中国有中国的。两国都别对对方发生的极端事件幸灾乐祸,多一些相互的借鉴和祝愿吧。有一点很清楚:和平与秩序对任何社会都是头等重要的。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Turkey: Europe’s Quiet Surrender

Nigeria: The Global Fallout of Trump’s Travel Bans

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Germany: Trump’s Words and Putin’s Calculus

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Topics

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Spain: Global Aid without the US

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Related Articles

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

China: US Chip Restrictions Backfiring

Thailand: US-China Trade Truce Didn’t Solve Rare Earths Riddle

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle